How can Darwin's natural selection theory be correct if we are attracted to

Question: How can Darwin's natural selection theory be correct if we are attracted to models!?

If we all aim to look like models and have unrealistic views of ourselves and beauty how can natural selection work!?
Models make up like 10% of the population and yet we find them more attractive!.!.!.
why don't we all look like models!? if natural selection is real we should involve into the most attractive species!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

you are not talking about natural selection at all!. you are talking about sexual selection!. the two have only one thing in common!. they both attempt to explain how evolution occurs!.

sexual selection in general does lead to more appealing physical characteristics!. but you have to bear in mind the demographics of gene pools!. if we examine locales with mostly unattractive people, unattractiveness is the starting point and competition for attractiveness is low!. Therefore, progress will be slow!. But go to San Diego, for example, where most people are rather attractive, and the competition for attractiveness is correspondingly high!. Offspring get better looking with each generation!.

also, it is generally the case that the more the races, or colors of people, mate together, the more attractive is each generation of offspring!.

This is all sexual selection at work, not natural selection!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

i don't think natural selection has anything to do with how pretty something is, its who can survive the best!. An animal is most fit when it survives the most and its kind are eaten less over other types of animals!. That's natural selection!.

Think of it this way, in the forest there are two types of butterflies in equal amounts, purple ones and brown ones!. After a month there are way more brown butterflies than purple ones because predators can't find the brown ones because they blend in with rocks, bark, dirt and stuff while the purple ones stand out!. Natural selection chose the brown ones to survive because they had more 'fitness' (more fit to survive)!.

purple butterflies would be prettier than brown ones, but their not as functional!. Humans don't see a difference like this because we don't have any predators to eat us, and no way to have natural selection come out!. Models are just lucky!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Excellent question that can be easily answered!. You see, you're overlooking one vital element, which is this: people today are, on average, much uglier than what they have been in most of history, due to prossessed sugar, general laziness, etc!. Humans in this modern era, at least in first world countries, have stopped evolving in many ways because the ugly, weak, dumb, stupid, or otherwise genetically defected people don't die from natural causes anymore, so anyone these days can pass on his/her genes!. A thousand years ago, only the strong, healthy, and therefore good-looking lived, and were abe to pass on their genes!. A thousand years ago, the great majority of people in their youth were attractive!. By the way, I hope you're not one of those people who don't believe in evolution because of your religion so you *look* for ways to disprove it--that's very biased!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

You are looking at the wrong discipline!. This boils down to conditioning, not evolution!.

And the reason we don't all look like models is because our bodies stored fat for survival for a very, very long time!. It has only been in the last few hundred years that it has not been necessary for survival!. It takes more then a few hundred years for something to "weed" itself out!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

men are attracted to anything with a pulse!. Its only women who put models on a pedestal!.

Edit: Ha, I got thumbs down, how come!? You don't agree with me!? Then take the model out of the picture and see if the men don't move straight on to the next woman in the hens pecking order!. Remove that woman too and see if they don't move on again, and so on and so forth!. Men aren't as fickle as you think!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

we are attracted to symmetry!. Obviously, not everyone looks like that, and before the media, nobody was exposed to that much beauty, so we made do with what was near us!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

You're barking up the wrong the tree!.

Natural selection states that the strong will survive and the weak will fall!. In today's terms:

Attractive people = Strong
Unattractive people = Weak

Would you want to be a size 0!? Honestly!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Yeah, and it seems to me that people would be getting stronger rather than weaker, physically and emotionally!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Great thesis!. Remember that beauty is relative to the admiring individual!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

todays society is so dumb!. they'll like what ever is told is goodlookingWww@QuestionHome@Com

I guess what you're asking is, if evolution is true then why are there ugly people still in existence!? Why wouldn't there only be hot people left if everybody prefer to pass on his/her genes with an attractive person!. I guess because it pays your selfish genes to have a preference for hot people (because if you get one your genes will have an advantage) but it would be lethal to your genes if you only had to pass them on with the genes of an attractive person (because what if you couldn't get an attractive person) it would be better to get an average or ugly person then nothing at all I guess!.Www@QuestionHome@Com